Skip to main content
Niyamam AI- Beta Niyamam AI- Beta

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S. No. 918 /2016

Case between Vaheeda et al vs Shri.T.P.M. Ibrahim Khan et al regarding injunction

Court
II ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Smt. Needi.K. Dinamany.
Order Date
2024-07-08
Duration
approximately-7 years 6 months

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiffs, legal heirs of late N.A.K. Haji, filed a suit seeking both mandatory and prohibitory injunction against the defendants, who are alleged to be obstructing a pathway that provides access to the plaintiffs' property. The defendants contend that the pathway claimed by the plaintiffs is imaginary and that they have the right to use their property as they see fit.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court granted a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction in favor of the plaintiffs against the defendants concerning the plaint B schedule property, restraining them from interfering with the plaintiffs' rights. However, the claim for mandatory injunction was denied as the plaintiffs failed to prove their entitlement.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants.
Case Type
Injunction
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
Plaintiffs are found to be in possession of the plaint B schedule property, which is crucial for their access.

Judgment Evidence:

The suit is decreed partly. Plaintiff is entitled to get a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining defendants from interfering with right over or committing any waste in plaint B schedule property.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Vaheeda (Age not specified years) Nambipunnilathu House, Edavilangu Village, Kodungallur Taluk, Thrissur District Shahana (Age not specified years) Nambipunnilathu House, Edavilangu Village, Kodungallur Taluk, Thrissur District Shafna (Age not specified years) Nambipunnilathu House, Edavilangu Village, Kodungallur Taluk, Thrissur District Shahid (Age not specified years) Nambipunnilathu House, Edavilangu Village, Kodungallur Taluk, Thrissur District

Defendants

Shri.T.P.M. Ibrahim Khan (65 years) S R M Road, Ernakulam Village, Kanayannur Taluk, Ernakulam District, Kochi – 682 018 Shri.K.M.Hamsa (60 years) 46/1411, S R M Road, Ernakulam Village, Kanayannur Taluk, Ernakulam District, Kochi – 682 018 Laila (Age not specified years) 46/1411, “Shafees’’ S R M Road, Ernakulam, Kochi – 682 018 Shafeeq (Age not specified years) 46/1411, “Shafees’’ S R M Road, Ernakulam, Kochi – 682 018 Shafeena (Age not specified years) 46/1411, “Shafees’’ S R M Road, Ernakulam, Kochi – 682 018

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiffs are entitled to a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining defendants from interfering with the plaint B schedule property.
Evidence:
Plaintiff is entitled to get a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining defendants from interfering with right over or committing any waste in plaint B schedule property.
Relief Type: Mandatory Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Plaintiffs sought a mandatory injunction for removing obstructions in the plaint B schedule property.
Evidence:
Hence issue No.2 is found against the plaintiffs.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Used to establish the ownership of the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Used to establish the ownership of the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Document
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Used as a title deed to demonstrate boundaries and property ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Photographs
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Evidence to support the defendant's claims regarding property boundaries.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Filed to provide an official assessment of the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Sketch
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Visual representation of the property boundaries as assessed.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Further examination of property boundaries and the path being disputed.
Reference:
Ext.C2

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Fri, 01/01/2016 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases